On Oct 7, 2010, at 1:20 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>>> Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>> Probably a /24. That allows a /56 for end-sites which is suboptimal
>> (end sites should be at least a /48), but, hopefully doesn't consume
>> too vast a swath of IPv6 in the process (roughly a /8).
>>>>> Does it provide enough space only for whom a /32 for native was enough or for all?
>By definition a /24 is enough for any ISP to do /56s for all of their IPv4 customers because
there are only 32 bits in IPv4. Since 6rd contains a mapping of the IPv4 /32 into the
IPv6 address, this is pretty basic.
Perhaps I don't understand your question.
> Would ARIN need to get another /12 to be able to address this from a distinct prefix? Would we expect all the other RiR's to do the same, and could IANA be kind enough to do it on a /8?
>Ideally I would like to see IANA set aside a block for this, such as 3f00/8. The RIRs might need more
than one /12 each to do this if they are giving out /24s.
> Could we expect all and sundry to deploy 6rd under these guidelines and how many bits would that actually consume?
>Don't know how many would deploy it. However, if EVERYONE using IPv4 today deployed in this manner and received a /24, it would consume a total (worldwide) of a bit less than a /8 (~/10+).
> And all even before any real use by real people.
>Not sure I understand this statement. That amount of space would facilitate 6rd to every existing customer of every ISP currently receiving IPv4 services and all future IPv4 deployments as well.
Owen